On abortion, the Biden administration wears its ignorance like a badge of honor

With the Dobbs decision, the Supreme Court said something very simple: because the United States Constitution does not encompass abortion, the federal government has no say in the matter; it is purely an issue for the states.  On Tuesday, voters in Kansas refused to adopt confusing language regarding limiting abortion "rights."  The Biden administration celebrated this outcome and then, speaking through a Joe Biden tweet and a Karine Jean-Pierre statement, proceeded to indicate that it doesn't understand either the Dobbs decision or our constitutional system.  As always, it's a question of whether they're really that dumb, whether they think we're that dumb, or whether they just don't care.

Here's the background:

In 2019, a Kansas Supreme Court decision held that the Kansas Bill of Rights provides a right to abortion.  This was not an explicit right, but an implied one.  The court reached it by following the same substantive due process analysis that led to the Roe v. Wade decision.

Last month, in the Dobbs decision, the United States Supreme Court held that the United States Constitution — which means the federal government — has no role whatsoever in abortion.  There is no substantive due process right.  There are no penumbras or emanations.  Instead, the matter is solely left to the states to decide based on local norms.  This is clear enough to be intelligible to the meanest intelligence, and yet, as I'll discuss in a moment, the Biden administration is unclear on the concept.

Image: Karine Jean-Pierre.  Twitter screen grab.

Following Dobbs, pro-life activists in Kansas asked voters to add the following language to the Kansas Bill of Rights:

§ 22. Regulation of abortion. Because Kansans value both women and children, the constitution of the state of Kansas does not require government funding of abortion and does not create or secure a right to abortion. To the extent permitted by the constitution of the United States, the people, through their elected state representatives and state senators, may pass laws regarding abortion, including, but not limited to, laws that account for circumstances of pregnancy resulting from rape or incest, or circumstances of necessity to save the life of the mother.

I'm a lawyer, and I found the language confusing.  When voters find language confusing, they will vote "no," which is precisely what happened, even though Kansas is a red state.  The "no" votes were undoubtedly helped by media messages and a flood of money and volunteers.  Still, it is what it is.

What followed were two bizarre pronouncements from the Biden White House.  The first ostensibly came from Biden himself, although the likelihood that Biden wrote this is as close to zero as anything can be:

Okay, Joe, let's start at the beginning: the Supreme Court made it very clear that it wants American citizens (both male and female) to have a say on abortion.  The whole point of the Dobbs decision is that the final say on abortion belongs to the people, not to five or more unelected judges.  Additionally, Congress has no say at all, something that Democrats consistently fail to grasp.  So, Joe, you are spiking the football for something that the Supreme Court already put into place over your objections.  Duh!

However, I'm beginning to see the Biden genius in putting Karine Jean-Pierre in place as his press secretary because she is so extraordinarily dimwitted that even Biden's most bizarre and banal pronouncements, by comparison, seem to have a certain wisdom:

Since Marbury v. Madison, in 1803, the unquestioned system in the United States has been that the Supreme Court determines whether something is unconstitutional or not.  Those who opposed Roe v. Wade argued that the Supreme Court erred in finding abortion constitutional, but they never argued that that act of making that ruling was itself unconstitutional.  Then, with Dobbs, the Supreme Court exercised its constitutional prerogative to adjudicate correctly that abortion is not the business of the federal government.

I know that I used three-syllable words, but the concepts are fairly simple.  Let me put it in language Jean-Pierre can understand:

SCOTUS has the power to decide what rights Americans have under the Constitution, including whether Americans can abort babies.  SCOTUS has had this decision-making power for 219 years.  In 1973, SCOTUS made a boo-boo when it decided that Americans have the right to abort babies.  Thankfully, SCOTUS has the power to correct its boo-boos, and that's what SCOTUS did in June when it said it was wrong in 1973.  Going forward, the feds need to shut up about abortion.  It's no longer any of the feds' business.

I fear, though, that Jean-Pierre's mind is simpler even than the most basic explanation.  She truly seems incapable of grasping our constitutional system of governance.

So, once again, I'm left asking myself this question: are the Bidenites truly this stupid?  Or do they believe that the American people are so stupid that the only way to communicate is at that presumed level of cretinism?  Or most worrisome of all, do the Bidenites simply not care?  That is, are they just going through the motions to keep us pacified because all the fixes are in; the systems are in place; and, behind the façade, constitutional governance ended in November 2020 or in November 2008 or 2012, or at some time long before that?

If you experience technical problems, please write to helpdesk@americanthinker.com